Yzermandius19

No, that actually happened in history, and you are so ignorant of it, you are trying to repeat it without even realizing what you are doing.

The political paradigm hasn't changed, the cycle has just come back around, and you lack perspective of American political history is all. Going far left has never won the Democrats an election, and it's not going to work now either.

Bill Peters lost his job because Calgary sucks, Marc Crawford lost his job because Chicago sucks. /shrugs

If all their death accomplished was to undermine the very cause they were willing to die for, I don't think they'd be very happy about that outcome if they ever realized it. That's the kind of thing that could trap a man in a hell of his own making unable to forgive himself. God will forgive him, but will he forgive himself? Perhaps if they realized it wasn't a cause worth dying for, and that undermining the cause was actually a good thing, that would allow them to get past it eventually and forgive themselves, otherwise that might be a tough sell.

I respect the courage of his convictions, I do not respect his effectiveness at achieving his cause whatsoever. Being slightly more respectable than those without the courage of their convictions seems like a rather low bar to me. At least they aren't cowards, good for them, such high praise.

Sure, but that has nothing with their ideology. When it comes to their ideology, if they are actively undermining their stated cause, that is not worthy of respect. Like I can respect someone who is actually speeding up the achievement of their stated goal, even if I don't agree with it, but for someone actively undermining their own cause out of misguided intentions, that doesn't exactly scream "respect".

Cant even respect the communists willing to kill and die for the World Socialist Revolution, because they are jumping the gun and slowing down their end goal by pushing socialism and demonizing free market capitalism. A communist with actual real courage of his convictions would embrace free market capitalism as the fastest way to a post-scarcity utopia, hell even Marx did that. These communists who think they can put the cart before the horse, skip free market capitalism and go right to socialism, are not to be respected, they are just impatient feckless virtue signalers that care more about intentions than results.

See the Democratic Socialists had my respect back then, I couldn't see them for what they truly were, I was basically one of them with a classical liberal streak that couldn't recognize the obvious contradiction. But then the libertarian streak allowed me to see them as the prattling phony spinless bourgeois twits enjoying the benefits of the market while railing against them, that they truly are. After I realized that even when they set the goal posts, they still lose the game to classical liberals very badly, even when it comes to economics, the one big issue that I had previously been sure they had it wrong on and simply didn't care, then the house of cards could not stand and the classical liberal in me was freed of the biggest baggage holding me back.

I bought into the socialism not being about getting to communism, but just the best way to help out the losers of free market capitalism and that those who disagreed simply didn't care about the losers. I never saw it for what it truly was until much later. Jettisoning my misguided demonization of economic success was a hurdle that needed to be overcome, it was a major problem for me until I saw the light. Once I realized the truth of it, the libertarian streak took care of the rest and allowed for quick and easy conversion away from the socialist bullshit.

I didn't think I did either, until I realized I had been drinking the socialist kool-aid and had mistaken that for a lack of ideology, then I spit that shit out right quick and corrected the error. My libertarian streak could no longer tempered by feckless virtue signaling about socialism being the best way to help the downtrodden, and I was off to the races, Red Pill City.

That's what I mean though. I was always a classical liberal, even when I was a lefty, I just didn't apply that to economics, because I bought into that all that bullshit about free market capitalism only being good for the rich at the expense of everyone else, and the right only caring about the rich. But then I started looking into which economic systems actually did the best at helping out those who aren't, and it turns out, the classical liberals were right about economics too, not just social issues, so that lead to me jettisoning the left wing economics pretty damn quick and embrace libertarianism more broadly. Dr Y has that classical liberal streak in him too, he just buys into too much propaganda about the negatives of the right and the positives of the left, and once he jettisons that, he'll be a lot less of a jellyfish.

My conversion was more dramatic than yours, for sure, but you are further to the right now than you were when I first showed up on the DCF, that's for damn sure. I'd like to think I helped play a part in that.

We used to be on the left too, we are just further along in the red pilling process than you are, and trying to show you the light, so you can get to where we are faster than you otherwise would have. I remember being a jellyfish too, but I outgrew that shit, you can too. In fact being such a jellyfish can actually be your path to salvation. Seeing as you see the truth on all sides, you obviously see the truth that left has admirable goals in wanting to protect the downtrodden and lift them up. But you have to ask yourself, which policies and ideology actually help out the downtrodden most and allow the downtrodden to help themselves the most? When you do that, and look into the facts behind whether left wing or right wing systems lead to the better outcomes for the downtrodden, you'll realize it's not the left that has the best solutions, they in fact have counter-productive solutions that undermine their stated cause and hold the downtrodden back. The right gets castigated as not caring about the downtrodden, yet they actually have the policies that help them a lot more than the left does, despite the lack of virtue signalling about caring about the downtrodden that is characteristic of the left. Once I came to that realization, the house of cards came tumbling down, and I never looked back. One of the great mistakes is to judge policies and programs by their intentions rather than their results, and back in the day, I was just as guilty of that as you were, if not more so. Take the emphasis off of the intentions, and start putting the emphasis on results, and you won't be a lefty for long, in my experience. The road to hell is paved with good intentions, once you start to realize that all the good intentions in the world doesn't make the left any better at helping the downtrodden, and the lack of virtue signaling about helping the downtrodden doesn't make the right any less good at helping the downtrodden, you'll finally will be free of the lefty indoctrination. The left likes to front like they are the only one's who care about helping the least successful become successful, but if we are judging by results, they clearly care a lot less about actually helping those people than those they castigate as heartless for not supporting their counter-productive policy proposals. The truth about the left is they are good at pointing out issues and pretending they are the only one's who care about said issues, but they actually suck at solving the issues they care about most, and their political enemies are vastly better at solving the issues they care about most, though they will never give them any credit for it.

Canadians are of course suckers for that pitch. No wonder they are selling out to the Chicoms.

All Communists are really fascists is left wing propaganda to whitewash the crimes of Commies.

Real property rights are one of the biggest reasons. As are real free speech rights. As is a real right to bear arms. None of which Canada has. Crown land is an example of Canada not having real property rights, one of the main things that holds it back from American dynamism.

China is worse, but Canada is getting bed with China, so apparently it wants to get even worse than it already is.

It does play out in the markets. Look at America, the only nation that actually protects property rights, it's no coincidence it's the largest market in the world. Real property rights are the backbone of it's prosperity, as is real speech rights, and the right to defend those rights by bearing arms. A deadly combo.

This is politics in land with no free speech where buying off the media is considered politics as usual. As for the notwithstanding clause, it makes most of charter rights void if the majority simply agrees that they are.

Looking down your nose at the light of civilization is just moronic, don't even need to be kin to take note of that.

It's still not actual property rights, not like in America. In America you can actually own the land, not just freehold it for the sovereign, because you are the sovereign.

No it doesn't. It confirms my theory. The press is bought and paid for by the Liberal Party of Canada, on the face of it. Your free speech rights don't exist the Notwithstanding Clause overrides them.

With me it was age so much. The American Religion was my salvation, God Bless America. Flight to Quality. It was the Light of Civilization itself that helped me to see the light.

So was I, but then I saw the truth of it, and recoiled in disgust.

The Clarity Act provides. Once Confederation is done away with, The Canada's will be far better off. Confederation is the anchor of a shotgun marriage that is weighing us all down. The provinces will be closer together as their own separate nations than they ever will be being forced into being a Fugazi Country. Let The Americans In, Let Quebec Out, and Let The Indians Up > Keep The Americans Out, Keep Quebec In, and Keep The Indians Down. Let go off this ridiculous Confederation, you'll feel a lot better afterwards, like a weight of shoulders.